Ledger, mandatory firmware update!?

[examplens]

Due to the recent drama caused by Ledger's recovery features, I stuck with the old firmware, i.e. the one that came with it. It was 2.1.0. In the meantime, I received some tokens at the BSC address from Ledger, so I decided to exchange them for a stable currency. When trying to do it on Pancakeswap, I get an unpleasant notification that I need to do a firmware update to approve the token transaction.
They do exactly what was expected, conditioning with the new (unsafe) firmware.
It's good that Ledger is not my default wallet, but they are really trying to justify the bad reviews.

[1714761606]

1714761606

[1714761606]

1714761606

[1714761606]

1714761606

[1714761606]

1714761606

[1714761606]

1714761606

[Pmalek]

You are probably using the old Nano S. The Ledger Recover feature isn't available for the Nano S. They said that from day one. All you can do is trust them on their word that it's true, which, based on their actions, is becoming harder and harder to do. The asset you are talking about is Binance Coin, right? Check on Ledger's website if that coin/token works in connection with a 3rd-party wallet, and try making your transaction from it. It could get rid of the error you are seeing in Ledger Live.

Check the supported coin and token wallets here:
https://www.ledger.com/supported-crypto-assets

[satscraper]

~

You may send received tokens to BSC address relevant to other wallet, let's say to Metamask,  and connect the latter to Pancakeswap.

AFAIK, Pancakeswap requires Ledger Live to interact with Ledger HW, thus, if firmware on you device is outdated , exchange   will  have too much  on their  plate.

[Lucius]

Sooner or later everyone who uses Ledger will have to do a firmware upgrade because otherwise the device will not function properly, or some functions will be disabled. Now the only question is whether someone thinks that Ledger is telling the truth when they say that the seed cannot be shared without the user's consent, or it have some kind of backdoor that has actually existed forever and the new firmware is just a trick to make everyone feel safer at least for a while.

Ledger unfortunately fell into the "don't store more on it than you can afford to lose" category.

[dkbit98]

I have no idea how pancakecrap works with ledger, but you had plenty of time to move your coins to some different wallet.
For months (and years) I was warning about dangers of using ledger products and most of you thought I was just extremist and ledger ''hater'' 
However, I don't see anything wrong in doing one last farewell update for your device, than move your coins to different wallet, and use hammer to smash your ledger.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Ledger unfortunately fell into the "don't store more on it than you can afford to lose" category.

And also important, "don't risk more privacy than you're willing to lose".  God they fucked everything up, and I'm just waiting for them to finally show some major cracks in their business.

Gotta love this advertisement, which should be labeled as "Now you can have your whole family get scammed!":

[LoyceMobile]

Ledger unfortunately fell into the "don't store more on it than you can afford to lose" category.

Always has been!

[Meuserna]

You are probably using the old Nano S. The Ledger Recover feature isn't available for the Nano S. They said that from day one. All you can do is trust them on their word that it's true, which, based on their actions, is becoming harder and harder to do.

There's no way to know if any of the code which enables key extraction on other Ledger devices is also on the Nano S even if Recover isn't compatible - and that's an important point I hope people understand.  Ledger has become a honeypot for hackers, so the fact that they've written code to extract keys means users have reason to fear their code.

Recover isn't compatible with the Nano S, but we have no way of knowing if any of the Recover code is now universal which would mean some of it may still be on the Nano S.

Ledger says it isn't.

Ledger lies all the time.  Only a fool would believe them.

Your best bet is to spend time learning about other hardware wallets so you can leave Ledger behind and never look back.  Ledger can't be trusted.

[Yamane_Keto]

I expect that the next step will be a warning about a necessary and urgent security update. Here, you are forced to update the firmware whether you like it or not. Therefore, not updating the firmware is temporary, and you must consider alternatives to Ledger.
For now, since BSC fees are low, send these tokens to another wallet, swap them and send them back to BSC's Ledger address new HW address.

thanks Pmalek

[Lucius]

~snip~

It doesn't seem to me that anything can harm them, and the reason is very simple - most of their users are completely unaware of everything that happened during the past years, some others don't really care, and only a small percentage have realized that something is really wrong.

Ledger unfortunately fell into the "don't store more on it than you can afford to lose" category.

Always has been!

I won't say that I didn't trust them, so I even bought two of their HW and we always advised others to invest in HW for security. Back then, there weren't too many choices except option L and option T, and I was personally (like many others) attracted by the device's design, which resembled an ordinary USB stick. Unfortunately, the security we once believed in has turned into a risk.

[examplens]

You are probably using the old Nano S.

It's the Nano X. 

I have no idea how pancakecrap works with ledger, but you had plenty of time to move your coins to some different wallet.

This time, I wanted to try it more out of curiosity, so I went through the swap process there. This doesn't seem like a bad idea, but it turned out to be a bad experience because of Ledger. And (at least to me) a definitive confirmation that at some point Ledger will be unusable with older firmware.
In the end, I went through Metamask, although it was an unnecessary point in the whole process, Ledger>Metamask>Pancakeswap.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It doesn't seem to me that anything can harm them, and the reason is very simple - most of their users are completely unaware of everything that happened during the past years, some others don't really care, and only a small percentage have realized that something is really wrong.

Based on a lot of the comments I've read on Ledger's subreddit, I think you're right about the pervasive ignorance--and it's not only absolutely astounding ignorance but utter indifference to the truth of what Ledger did when they introduced the recover feature.

I wouldn't bet that nothing can kill them, though.  Sometimes corporate decline takes a while, and if Ledger's management keeps making boneheaded decisions like they have been, it's only a matter of time before they go under.  It's too bad, too.  I always loved the Nano X, and now mine's in a landfill somewhere.

[Pmalek]

Recover isn't compatible with the Nano S, but we have no way of knowing if any of the Recover code is now universal which would mean some of it may still be on the Nano S.

They have mislead their users so many times, but I am trying to see the logic in them lying about Ledger Recover not being available for the Nano S, while it, in fact, is. I don't see it. I don't see what they stand to gain from telling the public that Ledger Nano S doesn't support Ledger Recover. Anyone who has ever owned the S model, knows about its memory limitations. It can currently not handle more than 2 (perhaps 3) standalone crypto apps. It would be interesting to see how big this part of the code is that onboards Ledger Recover. For now, it's a mystery.

I expect that the next step will be a warning about a necessary and urgent security update. Here, you are forced to update the firmware whether you like it or not. Therefore, not updating the firmware is temporary, and you must consider alternatives to Ledger.
For now, since BSC fees are low, send these tokens to another wallet, swap them and send them back to BSC's Ledger address.

Why send them back to a Ledger address if the goal is to migrate from Ledger elsewhere?

[Lucius]

Based on a lot of the comments I've read on Ledger's subreddit, I think you're right about the pervasive ignorance--and it's not only absolutely astounding ignorance but utter indifference to the truth of what Ledger did when they introduced the recover feature.

There are also those who think that this feature is actually positive, because insurance is still insurance, no matter how stupid and risky it seems in this case. On this forum, we can write "not your keys, not your coins" to the point of unconsciousness, but the average investor in Bitcoin has not gone beyond what every bank offers him in his thinking.

You open an account, get a bank card and PIN, and any damage caused by hacking/theft of the card will be compensated by the bank - just as savings deposits in banks (at least in most of the EU) are insured up to EUR 100 000.

I wouldn't bet that nothing can kill them, though.  Sometimes corporate decline takes a while, and if Ledger's management keeps making boneheaded decisions like they have been, it's only a matter of time before they go under.  It's too bad, too.  I always loved the Nano X, and now mine's in a landfill somewhere.

Maybe it is like that in the US, but here we are talking about a company that is in the EU and where things are a little different. When we look back at everything that has happened around Ledger up to today, not a single company has appeared that would seriously compete with Ledger in any sense, whether it is about prices, marketing or something else.

[Pmalek]

There are also those who think that this feature is actually positive, because insurance is still insurance, no matter how stupid and risky it seems in this case. On this forum, we can write "not your keys, not your coins" to the point of unconsciousness, but the average investor in Bitcoin has not gone beyond what every bank offers him in his thinking.

You open an account, get a bank card and PIN, and any damage caused by hacking/theft of the card will be compensated by the bank - just as savings deposits in banks (at least in most of the EU) are insured up to EUR 100 000.

Change is slow and takes time. If people have never had a negative experience with a bank, they wouldn't have a reason to want something different. The self-custody aspect of bitcoin isn't a big concern too many holders. Sadly, it only becomes so after a big disappointment, and then it's often too late. But there are positive signs. Less and less people are holding their crypto on exchanges.

It's easier to expect the change to come from people and whole regions where they are constantly experiencing difficulties to bank normally. The EU and the Western nations aren't necessarily on that list.